To all the star-struck guys out there who feel the only way to win a title is to have at least two stars on your roster I ask this question:

Give me a title winning team which had two recognized "stars," where both stars were not two-way players- guys who could distinguish themselves on both ends of the court (especially as 1/1 defenders) and both were known as one-dimensional scorers frequently indifferent to the art of D?

I'm thinking that on most title winning teams the top stars on those teams were also guys who paid a lot of attention to defense...Or am I wrong?

So to reiterate, I would love to see examples of title winning teams (I'd even look at runner-up teams) where the two top dogs had reps as offense-only volume scorers, who were known for playing little heed to their defensive responsibilities, or were just downright bad as defenders.

Just wondering.

What's the alternative?

Knicks have been terrible for a decade.

85% of the NBA haven't been title contenders in any point in the league's history - it's been dominated by Boston, LA, Chicago, in recent years San Antonio, with the occasional Miami and Detroit getting a flash moment in the sun.

Knicks have a max player and 3 young players all due for significant raises in the next 17 months, which will erase their cap space for years to come.

So who is this (or these) two-way star(s) coming the Knicks way anytime soon?

Name them, how the Knicks get them, and what makes you absolutely certain the next CBA won't make that impossible?

Any knucklehead can shoot holes in the actual present opportunity. Few opportunities are flawless.

But unless you can carve a path to a viable superior alternative, you're just engaging in the common - criticizing the possible in comparison to the more attractive alternative of your fantasy.

Paladin55 wrote:...but what kind of stars they are.

To all the star-struck guys out there who feel the only way to win a title is to have at least two stars on your roster I ask this question:

Give me a title winning team which had two recognized "stars," where both stars were not two-way players- guys who could distinguish themselves on both ends of the court (especially as 1/1 defenders) and both were known as one-dimensional scorers frequently indifferent to the art of D?

I'm thinking that on most title winning teams the top stars on those teams were also guys who paid a lot of attention to defense...Or am I wrong?

So to reiterate, I would love to see examples of title winning teams (I'd even look at runner-up teams) where the two top dogs had reps as offense-only volume scorers, who were known for playing little heed to their defensive responsibilities, or were just downright bad as defenders.

Just wondering.

Just want to make sure I understand the goal posts. Is it that BOTH of the top 2 had to be good defenders?

Couple where only one of the two were:

Hakeem and Drexler (Drex was no defensive juggernaut)

Isiah and Dumars (Du was good, Isiah rested on D)

While Bird, McHale, Parrish may have arguably been the best front court in history, Birds D was sporadic.

Kobe Gasol (Is Gasol any better than Amare?)

Who were the great defenders on the Vlade Lakers? Not Magic, Worthy or Vlade.

MS wrote:Iverson and Melo is the same thing as STAT and Melo.

Given 'Melo is the common denominator, you just compared Iverson at the tail end of this career (established fact) to Amare Stoudemire.

Good work there.

We need size. Jordan, Gasol, Baby, Free Agents.

The first two RESTRICTED free agents.

Do you understand what that means?

Knickoftime wrote:Your smugness ignored for the moment, you (and others) are still missing and conspiciously ignore the obvious.

What's the alternative?

Knicks have been terrible for a decade.

85% of the NBA haven't been title contenders in any point in the league's history - it's been dominated by Boston, LA, Chicago, in recent years San Antonio, with the occasional Miami and Detroit getting a flash moment in the sun.

Knicks have a max player and 3 young players all due for significant raises in the next 17 months, which will erase their cap space for years to come.

So who is this (or these) two-way star(s) coming the Knicks way anytime soon?

Name them, how the Knicks get them, and what makes you absolutely certain the next CBA won't make that impossible?

Any knucklehead can shoot holes in the actual present opportunity. Few opportunities are flawless.

But unless you can carve a path to a viable superior alternative, you're just engaging in the common - criticizing the possible in comparison to the more attractive alternative of your fantasy.

Perfect analysis of the "smugness" of the posters who attack this deal and the reality of what things would be like if this deal doesn't happen. Thanks.

matt wrote:Just wondering, but when has there been a team with two scorers as good as Amare and Melo, in a wack but entertaining offense like this?

1.	Tiny Archibald*-KCO	34.0
2.	Kareem Abdul-Jabbar*-MIL	30.2
3.	Spencer Haywood-SEA	        29.2
4.	Lou Hudson-ATL	                27.1
5.	Pete Maravich*-ATL	        26.1
6.	Charlie Scott-PHO	        25.3
7.	Geoff Petrie-POR	        24.9
8.	Gail Goodrich*-LAL	        23.9
9.	Sidney Wicks-POR	        23.8

Atlanta was 46-36 with Hudson and Maravich, I seem to recall that Hudson was a pretty good defender, Maravich was a joke on D.

1.	Bob McAdoo*-BUF	                31.1
2.	Kareem Abdul-Jabbar*-LAL	27.7
3.	Pete Maravich*-NOJ	        25.9
4.	Tiny Archibald*-KCK	        24.8
5.	Fred Brown-SEA	                23.1
6.	George McGinnis-PHI	        23.0
7.	Randy Smith-BUF	                21.8

You could probably find some mediocre, but high scoring, teams who have long been forgotten.

The fact is that I don't think you can find the kind of team I am asking folks to find, and the simple reason is that a team with that kind of make-up is not going to win a title.

BlueSeats wrote:

martin wrote:

BlueSeats wrote:Just want to make sure I understand the goal posts. Is it that BOTH of the top 2 had to be good defenders?

I think he meant both were bad/average defenders.

How many elite teams are there where both their top guys were deficient at defense.

I will say this. I have seen both Amare and Melo play good defense. It is not their specialty, but it's there. However, they both play HOF caliber offense (IOW barring catastrophic injury if either wins a chip they're in.)

In another thread I compared Melo's stats to other HOF offensive machines. I suspect history would show that HOF players give you a better chance to win than mediocre two-way role players.

The defensive acuity of this team is equally dependent on the coach at this stage of the game, IOW the kind of players they are surrounded with and the focus put on it.

My point: I think we have a better chance to win a championship with these two than without. There are always opportunity costs, but there is no current calculus that can project us from a .500 team to a championship overnight. You seem to be inferring you have one up your sleeve. Lets see it.

I think this post of mine def got lost in all of the threads, so I am reposting.

http://www.ultimateknicks.com/forum/topic.asp?t=38137&page=3#830127

Here is a better plan than the one for Melo:

Let's make assumption that Chandler is $8M next year.

I am also going to assume that at the beginning of next year the Knicks, if they stay together as a whole, are mostly the same team roster wise. I will make a slight assumption that the team as a whole are better than this year: They will have had a year together; Chandler, Gallo, Moz, Fields still have growing room (IMHO Moz and Fields will get significantly better and also recall that this past offseason was really the first the both Chandler and Gallo could practice for an entire off-season). Before next season, 2011 pick is up, and Donnie has slight maneuverability with AR to upgrade his backup PG spot, which is the Knicks' weakest position. I think those are all reasonable things.

Without the need to figure out his rotations and starting lineup, MDA and team have an advantage over year 2010/2011 in terms of how to attach season. Moz settles down from last year and is OK enough to start full time. I think this alleviates Turiaf from starting and playing minutes towards which he will get hurt; ie, he plays the role of back as he should.

The Knicks as a team are better *and* more importantly individuals like Gallo, Chandler, Moz, Fields are also better than before because of the extra year of experience. This would increase their values some. Not sure how much. I don't think this is too much of a stretch.

CP3 or Deron come up. I believe that if Orlando tanks in playoffs Dwight will grumble enough and may scare his ownership ****less.

Those are 3 guys you can target while growing your team internally.

If Utah wants value for a departing Deron: Chandler(or Gallo)/Felton/TD/2011 pick, 2013 pick. Utah will need a starting PG to replace Deron and don't think Hayward is ready to be a starter yet. Utah can be competitive for another year or 2 with Jefferson, Millsap, Chandler/Gallo, Felton, Raja, Okur, Gordan, CJMiles and they can also rebuild after that.

Same deal with CP3. Or if NO wants cap relief: CP3/OK4: Chandler/Felton/Moz/Turiaf/2013 pick.

For Dwight, I may give up a lot cause I think a front line of Dwight, Amare, Felton can compete against anyone: Moz/Turiaf/Gallo/Chandler/picks.

Dwight has indicated either NY or LA. I think LA has a better shot at him IF they want to break up a team that just won 3 championships, I think they win this year.

Blue, Amare and Melo are nowhere in the same league as LeBron/Wade defensively, and yet Miami's duo can match offense with Amare/Melo all day. And Miami has Bosh to boot.

I am beginning to think that Durant/Westbrook can match the output of Amare/Melo and be better defends and their team has many more legit starters and bench then the Knicks would after Denver deal.

My point: I think we have a better chance to win a championship with these two than without.

The team with Melo/Amare definitely is better than today's team. But how does it get past the second round?

Amare  		 $19.9 
Melo		 $19.9 
Turiaf 		
Mozgov 		 $3.1 
TD		 $2.0 
Williams 	 $1.0 
Rautins 	 $1.0 
Fields 		 $3.0 
2011 First Round $1.0 
-------------------------		
		 $50.9

Without a 2012, 2014 pick and a 36 year old expiring Chauncy, how does that team upgrade significantly enough to beat CHI, MIA, LAL, OKC, with the general assumption that those teams could also upgrade in small bits too and will compete for the same UFA's.

Knicks need to upgrade defense, starting PG, bench depth, backup PG. And we also assume that Moz and Fields are good enough starting caliber players for deep playoff team.

martin wrote:

Amare  		 $19.9 
Melo		 $19.9 
Turiaf 		
Mozgov 		 $3.1 
TD		 $2.0 
Williams 	 $1.0 
Rautins 	 $1.0 
Fields 		 $3.0 
2011 First Round $1.0 
-------------------------		
		 $50.9

Without a 2012, 2014 pick and a 36 year old expiring Chauncy, how does that team upgrade significantly enough to beat CHI, MIA, LAL, OKC, with the general assumption that those teams could also upgrade in small bits too and will compete for the same UFA's.

Knicks need to upgrade defense, starting PG, bench depth, backup PG. And we also assume that Moz and Fields are good enough starting caliber players for deep playoff team.

Amare $19.9
Gallo $12.6 (his cap hold)
Chandler $9
Mozgov $3.1
TD $2.0
Williams $1.0
Rautins $1.0
Fields $6.0 (he'll get his 3rd year max in 2012)
2011 First Round $1.5
-------------------------
$56.1

And you're also left with the decision of giving Felton a significant raise, or letting him walk. Either way, you're over the cap.

So YOU tell me, where is the upgrade on defense, starting PG, bench depth, back-up PG coming from?

Be specific please.

How is that framework of a team competing against LAL, MIA, CHI?

martin wrote:

BlueSeats wrote:

martin wrote:

BlueSeats wrote:Just want to make sure I understand the goal posts. Is it that BOTH of the top 2 had to be good defenders?

I think he meant both were bad/average defenders.

How many elite teams are there where both their top guys were deficient at defense.

I will say this. I have seen both Amare and Melo play good defense. It is not their specialty, but it's there. However, they both play HOF caliber offense (IOW barring catastrophic injury if either wins a chip they're in.)

In another thread I compared Melo's stats to other HOF offensive machines. I suspect history would show that HOF players give you a better chance to win than mediocre two-way role players.

The defensive acuity of this team is equally dependent on the coach at this stage of the game, IOW the kind of players they are surrounded with and the focus put on it.

My point: I think we have a better chance to win a championship with these two than without. There are always opportunity costs, but there is no current calculus that can project us from a .500 team to a championship overnight. You seem to be inferring you have one up your sleeve. Lets see it.

I think this post of mine def got lost in all of the threads, so I am reposting.

http://www.ultimateknicks.com/forum/topic.asp?t=38137&page=3#830127

Here is a better plan than the one for Melo:

Let's make assumption that Chandler is $8M next year.

I am also going to assume that at the beginning of next year the Knicks, if they stay together as a whole, are mostly the same team roster wise. I will make a slight assumption that the team as a whole are better than this year: They will have had a year together; Chandler, Gallo, Moz, Fields still have growing room (IMHO Moz and Fields will get significantly better and also recall that this past offseason was really the first the both Chandler and Gallo could practice for an entire off-season). Before next season, 2011 pick is up, and Donnie has slight maneuverability with AR to upgrade his backup PG spot, which is the Knicks' weakest position. I think those are all reasonable things.

Without the need to figure out his rotations and starting lineup, MDA and team have an advantage over year 2010/2011 in terms of how to attach season. Moz settles down from last year and is OK enough to start full time. I think this alleviates Turiaf from starting and playing minutes towards which he will get hurt; ie, he plays the role of back as he should.

The Knicks as a team are better *and* more importantly individuals like Gallo, Chandler, Moz, Fields are also better than before because of the extra year of experience. This would increase their values some. Not sure how much. I don't think this is too much of a stretch.

CP3 or Deron come up. I believe that if Orlando tanks in playoffs Dwight will grumble enough and may scare his ownership ****less.

Those are 3 guys you can target while growing your team internally.

If Utah wants value for a departing Deron: Chandler(or Gallo)/Felton/TD/2011 pick, 2013 pick. Utah will need a starting PG to replace Deron and don't think Hayward is ready to be a starter yet. Utah can be competitive for another year or 2 with Jefferson, Millsap, Chandler/Gallo, Felton, Raja, Okur, Gordan, CJMiles and they can also rebuild after that.

Same deal with CP3. Or if NO wants cap relief: CP3/OK4: Chandler/Felton/Moz/Turiaf/2013 pick.

For Dwight, I may give up a lot cause I think a front line of Dwight, Amare, Felton can compete against anyone: Moz/Turiaf/Gallo/Chandler/picks.

Dwight has indicated either NY or LA. I think LA has a better shot at him IF they want to break up a team that just won 3 championships, I think they win this year.

Blue, Amare and Melo are nowhere in the same league as LeBron/Wade defensively, and yet Miami's duo can match offense with Amare/Melo all day. And Miami has Bosh to boot.

I am beginning to think that Durant/Westbrook can match the output of Amare/Melo and be better defends and their team has many more legit starters and bench then the Knicks would after Denver deal.

My point: I think we have a better chance to win a championship with these two than without.

The team with Melo/Amare definitely is better than today's team. But how does it get past the second round?

Amare  		 $19.9 
Melo		 $19.9 
Turiaf 		
Mozgov 		 $3.1 
TD		 $2.0 
Williams 	 $1.0 
Rautins 	 $1.0 
Fields 		 $3.0 
2011 First Round $1.0 
-------------------------		
		 $50.9

Without a 2012, 2014 pick and a 36 year old expiring Chauncy, how does that team upgrade significantly enough to beat CHI, MIA, LAL, OKC, with the general assumption that those teams could also upgrade in small bits too and will compete for the same UFA's.

Knicks need to upgrade defense, starting PG, bench depth, backup PG. And we also assume that Moz and Fields are good enough starting caliber players for deep playoff team.

What am I missing, I don't think swapping Deron, CP3 or Howard projects us to a championship either, and who's to say we wont get played just as bad in those negotiations?

There are no guarantees. Winning a Chip requires more than just a strategy, it also requires great luck. You have to do things that put you in a position to contend for one. Being a perennial second round of playoffs is getting there. Then you can be in a position where a DeBusschere can put you over the top. How do you get that player? Who knows: get lucky in the draft, the MLE, a good trade...you gotta get lucky.

But languishing at .500 and pining for longer shots than the one at hand doesn't position you any better.

It's a bit like chess. While in the end the difference of one pawn can decide the game at the end, you don't have to know exactly which pawn it will be when in the mid-game you're deciding if you should sacrifice a knight and bishop to capture a queen.

Again, I have no problem with you not liking Melo or not liking whatever package you are assuming we are giving up, but this idea that you don't do anything unless this one move makes you a champ is silly, and you can post your above post ad infinitum, but it ain't in it either, nor do you know you could get it done.

martin wrote:I outlined it in the very post you just quoted the above but you chopped it out.

Let's address the issues with your suggestions.

1.) The new CBA will likely make it more difficult for drafted, established stars to leave, or least the incentive will be altered favorably to the original team. There is even the possibility of a franchise tag.

A new CBA, and changes, are a certainty. No one knows what they will be exactly, but we do know what the owners want.

Any way you slice it, you're taking a risk forgoing an actual opportunity for a theoretical one.

2.) One of the 3 names you've mentioned has made it publicly known playing WITH the guy you're passing up is a priority. Just strikes me as oddly turning a blind eye to this fact.

3.) (And this is the more relevant one), you've built yourself a house of cards of circumstance that ALL must go your way in order for any of them to be a reality.

They are:

a.) that Chandler and Gallinari stay healthy (not a non-factor for either of them) and that both of them AND Mozgoz indeed continue to progress and establish greater consistency (something that continues to allude the first two this season) AND that the Felton of the first month and 1/2 is the truer version of the Felton of the last 2 months.

b.) that despite the fact the Knicks, if retaining Chandler this off-season, would NOT have max cap space available in 2012, that Utah, or New Orleans or Magic would be willing to deal with the Knicks; and that

c.) No other team can or will make superior offers.

So in summary, you're alternative to Melo is predicated on:

- The CBA not restricting player movement.

- One of these players wanting to come to the Knicks at all.

- One of their teams willing to trade with the Knicks despite the Knicks not having the leverage of the necessary cap room in the off season.

- The Knicks current assets progressing sufficiently to be attractive to those teams.

- No other team in the mix with superior offers.

ANY one of these factors doesn't come to pass, and your entire scenario crumbles under its own weight.

And for this speculative scenario, you want to bypass the opportunity to improve now, before the new CBA?

I'll reiterate my original point.

"You're just engaging in the common - criticizing the possible in comparison to the more attractive alternative of your fantasy."